Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 8, 2026

Hybrid PET/MRI Imaging of Alzheimer's Disease Based on 18F-AV-1451
Published on: April 18, 2025
Alzheimer's Imaging Consortium
Christopher C Rowe1,2, Ishara Paranawithana1,3, Vincent Dore1,3
1Department of Molecular Imaging & Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Background:
Visual read of Aβ PET remains standard clinical practice. 18F-NAV4694 (NAV) has high affinity for Aβ and low non-specific binding so may be more accurate than older Aβ tracers. We compared visual read of NAV to 18F-Florbetapir (FBP) PET using standard and AI corrected Centiloid (CL) thresholds as gold standard.
Method:
150 participants (71.3±6.0 years) in the AIBL study underwent both scans within 2 years. Scans were read by 6 nuclear medicine physicians blinded to CL. Reader performance was compared against various CL thresholds. CL was measured with CapAIBL using a) the standard method, b) a composite cerebellum plus hemispheric white matter reference region for FBP and c) with an AI correction method for the CL SUVR (DeepSUVR). The DeepSUVR correction was learnt from a separate dataset of longitudinal scans where unexpected temporal changes were penalized and a tracer specific SUVR correction factor was developed for application to single scans.
Result:
CL frequency distribution graphs differed for NAV and FBP. Applying the DeepSUVR correction improved the correlation (R2) between NAV and FBP CL from 0.82 to 0.94, predominantly by boosting many mid-range FBP CL values and reducing FBP variance around zero CL (Figure 1). The FBP composite reference region had a similar though less marked effect. The thresholds that produced peak visual read accuracy with standard and DeepSUVR CL methods were 15CL and 11CL for NAV, and 29CL and 21CL for FBP (Figure 2). Mean sensitivity at peak accuracy thresholds was higher in NAV with 97% for standard and 96% for DeepSUVR methods compared to 93% for both methods in FBP. Mean specificity at the same thresholds was similar with 95% for NAV and FBP with standard CL while DeepSUVR produced a specificity of 97% for both tracers.
Conclusion:
Visual read of amyloid PET can accurately detect levels of amyloid below the traditional thresholds of 20 or 25CL for a positive scan. Visual read thresholds vary by tracer and reader experience. AI correction of CL with the DeepSUVR method significantly improves the performance of Florbetapir but NAV4694 remains more sensitive to low amyloid levels.
More Related Videos
09:31Visualization of Amyloid β Deposits in the Human Brain with Matrix-assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Imaging Mass Spectrometry
Published on: March 7, 2019
12:50Lesion Explorer: A Video-guided, Standardized Protocol for Accurate and Reliable MRI-derived Volumetrics in Alzheimer's Disease and Normal Elderly
Published on: April 14, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Alzheimer's Disease: Overview
The clinical diagnosis of AD hinges on the presence of memory and other cognitive impairments. Biomarkers, such as changes in Aβ...
Imaging Studies III: Computed Tomography
Imaging Studies IV: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Brain Imaging
These technologies include computerized axial tomography (CAT or CT scans), positron-emission tomography (PET scans), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and Transcranial Magnetic...
Imaging Studies II: Positron Emission Tomography and Scintigraphy
Fundamental Principles of PET
Imaging Studies I: CT and MRI
Description of the Procedures
Computed Tomography (CT) scan:
Computed Tomography (CT) scans use X-ray technology to generate detailed images of bones, organs, and tissues. During the scan, the patient lies on a moving table...